Dialogue About Gay Exit Polls

My friend Sarah, who I deeply admire and respect, posted a very impassioned comment to my Gay Exit Polls post.

Below is her comment, followed by my response. I invite Sarah or anyone else to comment in order to keep the discussion going. Thanks Sarah!

Sarah's Comment:

"First off, gays in California and New York may be percieved as people living the 'luxury' life of looking past homosexuality. I disagree. The Defense Against Marriage Act has been a pain in every single gay man and woman's life.

My friend can't even walk down the streets of Santa Cruz with her partner for fear of being beat up. She goes to the restroom at home because she's been beaten up so many times for who she is. One cannot ignore that even in West Hollywood hate crimes happen on a daily basis, many of these crimes are not even reported. Families are ripped apart everywhere in the nation soley for living the life they were born to live.

Do not take for granted the exits just because they were only done in CA and NY."

My Response:

I of course don't think that being gay in CA or NY is a perfect existence. I am painfully aware of the everyday problems facing the LGBT community, and I fully understand that metropolitan residents are not immune to these same issues.

I do, however, completely agree with Mr. Crain's assessment that things are different in the South and in other areas of the country.

As a resident of California, I could get a domestic partnership and have some form of relationship recognition with my partner. I can adopt a child and have my partner have a legal tie to our children. I can have the comfort of knowing that if I am fired or beaten up because of my sexual orientation, I will have non-discrimination and hate crimes protections.

For LGBT people living in some other states, they can't enjoy any of the rights and responsibilities of relationship recognition, in fact, it may be written into their state's constitution that they are never to have such rights. They are completely unable to adopt a child and have their loved ones have any legal connection to the child. Their boss can walk into their office and say "I am firing you because you are gay" with NO legal recourse whatsoever. They can be beaten up or killed simply for being gay and their local law enforcement would receive no resources to be able to prosecute the crime with a tougher sentence.

They are different. There are different concerns wherever you live no matter what your orientation may be. All that I am saying is that these exit polls should be treated with the knowledge that they are a very small sampling and that they should not be treated as a sound bite that with one monolithic voice, the gay community supports one candidate over another.

While, we are talking about the "pain" of the Defense of Marriage Act, lets look at the origins of DOMA... signed by William Jefferson Clinton. In fact, the two most significant hurdles in the LGBT rights movement are DOMA and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Both of which originate in the Clinton administration.

I do not blame Hillary for this legislation, in fact I respect her answers to why her husband passed both DOMA and DADT. What I don't get is why she isn't committing to repeal all of DOMA, like Barack is.

Response to Clinton Supporter

I received a very well thought out comment from my friend Paula, who is someone I admire very much. Paula is an avid Clinton supporter and she made the case for Clinton in response to my Obama endorsement. It should be known that I am truly a big fan of Senator Clinton and should she win the nomination, I will put my full force behind her candidacy. It is a great feeling to have a choice between two great leaders, instead of the usual choice between the lesser of two evils.

Here are some excerpts from Paula's comment, along with my response:

Paula: It's true that experience is not everything, but to me that is like saying, "I want to elect Bush 'cause he's not one of those smart elitist guys. You can have a beer with him." It matters.

Adam: I do think experience matters and I do not want an unexperienced President; however, just as you later describe it unfair that Obama has a stranglehold on the word "hope," it is equally unfair that Clinton has a stranglehold on "experience." They are both Junior Senators, lawyers, Ivy League educated patriots with long careers in public service. This isn't a job description with a narrow qualifications field that says "Must have Bachelors and 3-years experience." Who is to determine what "experience" is needed to become President? The question is can they do the job? Can they get things accomplished? Can they keep our country safe, secure and successful? I believe that Obama's experiences in life have prepared him to be an incredible leader for this nation.

Paula: Hope? That has been his platform, but it is Clinton that is accused of cheap shots. "No Hillary, you don't provide hope for the future. You're more of the same...an extension of the current administration." Now THAT's a cheap shot.

Adam: I personally do draw hope and inspiration from Hillary as well, but it is simply a reality that she needs to address that she is viewed as the ultimate Washington insider and the ultimate polished politician. She is seen as playing the game very well and that does lump her in with the way Washington operates in a lot of people's minds. On the spectrum of "cheap shots," I don't think this is in the same galaxy as trying to compare the victories of a United States Senator and leading presidential candidate to an activist who got in the race to keep the other candidates honest, simply because they are both Black. Hillary may not win the cheap shot game, but former President Clinton sure has been on a rampage.

Paula: As for us all being the same and the media being divisive, I absolutely must suggest that we are still incredibly divided and it MATTERS to have a black man, and a woman, and a hispanic, run as a bona-fide candidate for president. We're just not there yet. And trust me, Obama WILL have an issue with Hispanics, and Indians, and Asians. That is the world we live in. It is changing, but the beauty and the heart-break of democracy is that it is very steady and very slow to change.

Adam: I agree that it matters to have anything divergent from the typical straight male WASP who dominates leadership in this country. "We're just not there yet." I am tired, I am just done with that phrase. I understand and accept that change is gradual, but it does not mean that for one second we should not put our full force of effort out there at all times. That is what excites me so much about Barack Obama. For months before anyone voted, the media was consumed with the question of "are we ready for a Black President?" Barack didn't sit back and wait for people to answer, he introduced himself to the predominately white voters of Iowa and convinced them that he was the best candidate for the job. Once he has the opportunity to introduce himself to the voters of the groups you mentioned, they will understand that we are there and we are ready. This blog has posted on the significant amount of influential hispanic leaders who have endorsed Barack and this morning in my hometown of Denver, former Secretary of Transportation and Mayor of Denver Federico Pena enthusiastically introduced Senator Obama at a major rally. My mind is truly boggled by this, can you please explain why Hillary is the better choice for Latinos?

Paula: I hope that no matter what happens, we both remember that whoever the democratic candidate turns out to be, it is going to be such a huge step for this country, and democracy, that I can't freakin' wait.

Adam: Completely agree and I can't wait either!

Paula: The possiblity for actual change is finally here. It's been a while since i've prayed, but I think the rosary beads are about to get dusted off.

Adam: Hail Mary indeed! Thanks Paula, keep the debate alive!